I have already posted in other threads about this so sorry for repeating.... but Mac OS and IOS are, afaik, essentially the same core OS. IOS being a derivative of OSX. They are built upon the same foundations.
Gruber points out that Apple is now calling Mac OS X simply OS X. I wonder if that means they will start to focus on a consumer notebook and desktop line that aren't called Macs.
Either way, it looks like this sub-Mac OS X/post-Darwin OS they once referred to as OS X is now being rebranded. I guess we'll have to find a different term for the core system that they both share. I think I'll use xOS and see if that catches on.
I have already posted in other threads about this so sorry for repeating.... but Mac OS and IOS are, afaik, essentially the same core OS. IOS being a derivative of OSX. They are built upon the same foundations.
But the Mac experience is so different that it would make no sense to make it limited to an IOS GUI. Just because you are able to view iMovie in Full Screen mode, it doesn't mean that it is dumbed down or IOS like. The menus are all still available. Menus that I think it unlikely will become available in the IOS version of the App for obvious reasons.
Apple is not replacing OSX with IOS, that is the wrong way to look at it.
How is OSX being dumbed down? Give me a few examples of things you can no longer do as a result of dumbing down.
Re OSX lite, there already is such a thing and it is called SimpleFinder. It is built into the OS and can be invoked through settings. It doesn't turn OSX into IOS but it is a simplified view of the OS with limited permissions. Maybe Apple will make Simple Finder look like IOS. I think that would be a great idea, personally.
Oh, and your first point... my apologies. Pot shots uncalled for. I just get a little jumpy when I see this IOS / OSX alarmism. .
I apologize.
I am seeing a lot of points here including this response causing me to pause and re-evaluate my position.
I am seeing a lot of points here including this response causing me to pause and re-evaluate my position.
I don't know if you read Daring Fireball but John Gruber got a private event last week and said this:
Quote:
Apple sees a fundamental difference between software for the keyboard-and-mouse-pointer Mac and that for the touchscreen iPad. Mountain Lion is not a step towards a single OS that powers both the Mac and iPad, but rather another in a series of steps toward defining a set of shared concepts, styles, and principles between two fundamentally distinct OSes.
I almost think it would make more sense for Apple to transition iOS to Intel, down the road of course. ARM works great right now, but has little competition given that Intel fell asleep from ingesting too much money in the 90's and early 21st century.
Intel wishes -- but highly unlikely that Apple would transition iOS to intel, for numerous reasons.
Intel have hardly won any favours with Apple by actively promoting and subsidising competition OEMs for MacBook Air.
Apple would be foolhardy to put themselves at the mercy of Intel.
Once Intel were monopoly sole supplier to Apple they would doubtless return to their old ways of exploiting their monopoly by overcharging.
One of the reasons Intel has failed to gain market share from ARM in the mobile sector is that OEMs are very reluctant to put themselves at the mercy of Intel's monopoly price exploitation. With ARM chips there is huge competition amongst numerous different chipmakers.
For years Intel have been announcing how they were going to start stealing mobile market share from ARM, all of which boasts have failed to materialise. Intel always claim they are catching up/overtaking ARM battery saving capabilities comparing their next generation of Intel chips with ARM's current chips. The problem for Intel is that ARM are not standing still but continuously upgrading their chip capabilities. In their pipeline ARM have 32/64 Bit multi-core chips (8 core and possibly 16 Core) 22 and 28 nano chips! Dream on Intel!
If Apple were to migrate to Intel that would mean Apple sacrificing their own chip design capabilities, recently enhanced by their Israeli Flash memory design capabilities. Why on each would Apple throw away the huge competitive advantage of being able to design their own chips to gain maximum efficiency with their OS software?
Far more likely is that Apple will migrate Macs to ARM Chips - Apple designed 64 Bit, 8 Multi-Core, 22 or 28 nano, with super efficient Flash.......sounds juicy to me!
There are a lot if people who have been saying, for several years now, that Apple won't converge the two OS's at all, and that it would be a bad idea. I've been saying, from the beginning, that they will. I've pointed out the origins of both, but that seemed to be thought to be of little significance. Now that Apple beginning (with Lion, mostly) to merge various functions and features, it's becoming more obvious to others that this is indeed happening. But Apple is still, for the most part, telling us that they will remain seperate.
I don't think that they will remain seperate. I think that even more code will converge. I even think that we will buy an app, likely from the App Store for this to happen, that will install on any of your devices, iOS, or otherwise, but just installing elements that will function on that particular device.
So we may see Pages install on every Apple device from just one purchase, but just load what will work on that device, be it a desktop, or a Touch. Fat Binaries is something Apple is quite familiar with, and so even if they are still using two processor families, it will work, just loading the binary needed on that platform.
This will make for a very smooth universe of devices.
But does this mean that every developer needs to develop a full MacOS app and then add the IOS elements before they can sell it through the App Store?
I think you are confusing what 'is possible' with what 'is practical'. Its like the lean forward and lean back argument vis a vis computers and telly. Its about context. To have a fully fledged word processing app on an iPhone or iPad I don't think makes sense. Its like the truck v the car argument. You don't need a crane, a trailer and 30" wheels on your daily car.
Apple sees a fundamental difference between software for the keyboard-and-mouse-pointer Mac and that for the touchscreen iPad. Mountain Lion is not a step towards a single OS that powers both the Mac and iPad, but rather another in a series of steps toward defining a set of shared concepts, styles, and principles between two fundamentally distinct OSes.
Perhaps it should be IOS across the board. The 'I' should stand for Internet with a capital 'I'. Then we would have: IOS small, med, large and XL for the ITV.
So far I don't think this is true at all. Why would I not want the OSX messaging app to be consistent with the iOS app? What's wrong with auto-save and auto-restore of windows?
I have yet to see an example of a technology or UI concept brought from iOS to OSX that has made me worse off. I can still run my open source unixy software from terminal -- which I do -- while gaining some of the advantages of iOS.
The only gripe I can see about the "iOS-ificiation" of OSX is that it might shift resources/efforts away from improving the X-specific aspects of OSX. For example, it would be nice to see some advances in the file system for power users, not just for users who want to only see files from within an app.
But I see no example of cases where Apple has taken away important features and replaced them with crippled iOS alternatives. If we wake up one day and can no longer go into terminal or open a Finder window, then we'll have something to complain about. But so far, I don't see the complaint.
Amen brother! ZFS? HFS+ is so antiquated.... Is it just me or does it seem like mountain lion is not going to bring ANY imporovements over lion or even snow leopard? Even lion was a very small step forward I think. I really dont think autosaving was made the best possible way in lion. It just made me uncomfiortable about my documents because I modify many times documents but need the old document aswell..
The day I cant use the terminal is the last day on os X for me. Not use bsd or linux software or java software. It absolutely makes no sense why they would take away this possibility but it may come someday if we dont fight it back. I wont swollow dumbing down os X with no alternatives. I think Lion has a lot of features i dont use or care of.... The istallation is a nightmare compared to snow leopard from a preinstalled image. I cant even make a deasent universal installer image nowadays which took 2 minutes and a few clicks earlier. I think lion is still going to bite me in ways if i like to reinstall a system...
And addressbook? What the fuck happoned with that one in lion???!!! Pig bastards!!!
Yeah, we'll eventually have a multitouch desktop OS that is operated in a way as different from the current keyboard/mouse paradigm as adding the mouse was from the keyboard/screen paradigm. I buy that.
But it better darn well be an OS that happens to run on phones and tablets, not the other way around. We need a file manager (and this is where Apple will really shine. They'll create something brand new here; an entirely new way of organizing and looking at your files) and to retain the rest of the features that make OS X OS X while incorporating the incredible potential of multitouch that makes iOS iOS.
We're beginning to see the first implementations of a new kind of file management:
Simply stated: Why should the [average] user know or care where his files are (and when/how they are saved/versioned/backed up...). We have computers that can do all that.
1) The OS (Lion) has versioning
2) Modern apps have autosaving
3) iCloud will evolve from an option [to store files] to the default
4) cross-device sync is already in place for many apps
5) some apps, like FCP X, use a built-in SQL db as part of their file structure -- future versions will allow collaboration by combining of these "individual" dbs into a cloud/server based multiuser collaboration db -- you can't change the Title on Clip 3 in Project B because Bill is editing that Title -- though, you can add video effects or edit sound...
You don't need to take it with you -- if you can access it from anywhere...
...think iTunes match -- each of our computers and iDevices have access to 16,177 items (I just checked). These are stored across 5 computers, and all accessible on any iDevice from iCloud -- wherever we are.
Gruber points out that Apple is now calling Mac OS X simply OS X. I wonder if that means they will start to focus on a consumer notebook and desktop line that aren't called Macs.
Either way, it looks like this sub-Mac OS X/post-Darwin OS they once referred to as OS X is now being rebranded. I guess we'll have to find a different term for the core system that they both share. I think I'll use xOS and see if that catches on.
I prefer OS-X, or xOS, for that matter, to Mac OS. I was using it because the X eol is getting ever nearer. aOS, perhaps? though that would get al messed up with IOS. I suspect there are a lot of names and version being bandied about at Apple these days.
We're beginning to see the first implementations of a new kind of file management:
Simply stated: Why should the [average] user know or care where his files are (and when/how they are saved/versioned/backed up...). We have computers that can do all that.
1) The OS (Lion) has versioning
2) Modern apps have autosaving
3) iCloud will evolve from an option [to store files] to the default
4) cross-device sync is already in place for many apps
5) some apps, like FCP X, use a built-in SQL db as part of their file structure -- future versions will allow collaboration by combining of these "individual" dbs into a cloud/server based multiuser collaboration db -- you can't change the Title on Clip 3 in Project B because Bill is editing that Title -- though, you can add video effects or edit sound...
You don't need to take it with you -- if you can access it from anywhere...
...think iTunes match -- each of our computers and iDevices have access to 16,177 items (I just checked). These are stored across 5 computers, and all accessible on any iDevice from iCloud -- wherever we are.
Have you ever wanted to upload a picture to a website using your iPhone or iPad? You can't do it without a special app specifically for that website. That is why Facebook, Twitter, Craigslist, etc. sites that use a lot of uploaded photos had to have their own app. I don't think iOS/iCloud file methodologies are necessarily an improvement over traditional file management. I would rather have access to the file system in addition to cloud storage.
You should make your post stupid proof, because it makes no sense.
No features are being removed from ML, it isn't being dumbed down. Features are being added, which leverages the innovations and usage patterns from the mobile space, providing tighter integration of data between platforms and seamless syncing. I don't see how you can't understand that most people will largely benefit from this. You want stupid proof? Go look at Windows 8.
Amen brother! ZFS? HFS+ is so antiquated.... Is it just me or does it seem like mountain lion is not going to bring ANY imporovements over lion or even snow leopard? Even lion was a very small step forward I think. I really dont think autosaving was made the best possible way in lion. It just made me uncomfiortable about my documents because I modify many times documents but need the old document aswell..
The day I cant use the terminal is the last day on os X for me. Not use bsd or linux software or java software. It absolutely makes no sense why they would take away this possibility but it may come someday if we dont fight it back. I wont swollow dumbing down os X with no alternatives. I think Lion has a lot of features i dont use or care of.... The istallation is a nightmare compared to snow leopard from a preinstalled image. I cant even make a deasent universal installer image nowadays which took 2 minutes and a few clicks earlier. I think lion is still going to bite me in ways if i like to reinstall a system...
And addressbook? What the fuck happoned with that one in lion???!!! Pig bastards!!!
99% of people have no idea what you're taking about. These are the people Apple are making products for and the market they are appealing to- not you. Anyway, keep your panties on. Terminal isn't going away anytime soon. To a clear-headed person that realizes now everyone in the world is like them, Apple is making all the right moves. There will always be people like you who don't agree, but that doesn't mean you should expect Apple to cater their product decisions and strategy to the niche market you're in.
First off I have intelligence and 25 years of IT, VM and Data Center experience and have watched a lot of MFG's do this same thing not just Microsoft ,so if you would be so kind as to refrain from taking pop shots and being condescending, please.
You say that iOS will not become the MacOS, how do you know this?
There is more evidence that they are moving MacOS in the direction of iOS than not.
They are replacing apps with in OS X with iOS versions slowly converting OS X to iOS via a slow and methodical transition.
However, for arguments sake I will give you your premiss that the two OS's will remain separate.
They are still dumbing down MacOS which is "obviously and surely a bad thing".
Go ahead and toast me up.
I hate to say this but maybe it is time for an OS X Lite or home version.
In what way are they dumbing down OS X? Surely, improving and standardizing the UI across several device classes is strengthening the OS -- not dumbing it down. As are, automatic versioning, backup restart, location services, AirPlay, Core Media APIs...
I can still do all the things I could do with every prior version of OS X (Rosetta excepted) -- and a whole lot more (a lot of that is due to iOS features being rewritten and reported to OS X).
That is how you access Notifications. It looks just like it does on iOS with the gray cloth background except that instead of sliding done from the top it slides the desktop over from right to left to reveal your notifications.
The one significant change I like about Notifications on ML over iOS is that it slides the desktop over to reveal Notifcations behind the desktop. Whereas on iOS the Notifications come in front of the desktop. This is significant and I think wrong in iOS because that background should indicate what is underneath, not on top. Perhaps that's me niggling but I think it's an important differentiation.
Comments
I have already posted in other threads about this so sorry for repeating.... but Mac OS and IOS are, afaik, essentially the same core OS. IOS being a derivative of OSX. They are built upon the same foundations.
Gruber points out that Apple is now calling Mac OS X simply OS X. I wonder if that means they will start to focus on a consumer notebook and desktop line that aren't called Macs.
Either way, it looks like this sub-Mac OS X/post-Darwin OS they once referred to as OS X is now being rebranded. I guess we'll have to find a different term for the core system that they both share. I think I'll use xOS and see if that catches on.
I have already posted in other threads about this so sorry for repeating.... but Mac OS and IOS are, afaik, essentially the same core OS. IOS being a derivative of OSX. They are built upon the same foundations.
But the Mac experience is so different that it would make no sense to make it limited to an IOS GUI. Just because you are able to view iMovie in Full Screen mode, it doesn't mean that it is dumbed down or IOS like. The menus are all still available. Menus that I think it unlikely will become available in the IOS version of the App for obvious reasons.
Apple is not replacing OSX with IOS, that is the wrong way to look at it.
How is OSX being dumbed down? Give me a few examples of things you can no longer do as a result of dumbing down.
Re OSX lite, there already is such a thing and it is called SimpleFinder. It is built into the OS and can be invoked through settings. It doesn't turn OSX into IOS but it is a simplified view of the OS with limited permissions. Maybe Apple will make Simple Finder look like IOS. I think that would be a great idea, personally.
Oh, and your first point... my apologies. Pot shots uncalled for. I just get a little jumpy when I see this IOS / OSX alarmism. .
I apologize.
I am seeing a lot of points here including this response causing me to pause and re-evaluate my position.
I apologize.
I am seeing a lot of points here including this response causing me to pause and re-evaluate my position.
I don't know if you read Daring Fireball but John Gruber got a private event last week and said this:
Apple sees a fundamental difference between software for the keyboard-and-mouse-pointer Mac and that for the touchscreen iPad. Mountain Lion is not a step towards a single OS that powers both the Mac and iPad, but rather another in a series of steps toward defining a set of shared concepts, styles, and principles between two fundamentally distinct OSes.
I wholeheartedly believe that is the absolutely correct way to view this.
I almost think it would make more sense for Apple to transition iOS to Intel, down the road of course. ARM works great right now, but has little competition given that Intel fell asleep from ingesting too much money in the 90's and early 21st century.
Intel wishes -- but highly unlikely that Apple would transition iOS to intel, for numerous reasons.
Intel have hardly won any favours with Apple by actively promoting and subsidising competition OEMs for MacBook Air.
Apple would be foolhardy to put themselves at the mercy of Intel.
Once Intel were monopoly sole supplier to Apple they would doubtless return to their old ways of exploiting their monopoly by overcharging.
One of the reasons Intel has failed to gain market share from ARM in the mobile sector is that OEMs are very reluctant to put themselves at the mercy of Intel's monopoly price exploitation. With ARM chips there is huge competition amongst numerous different chipmakers.
For years Intel have been announcing how they were going to start stealing mobile market share from ARM, all of which boasts have failed to materialise. Intel always claim they are catching up/overtaking ARM battery saving capabilities comparing their next generation of Intel chips with ARM's current chips. The problem for Intel is that ARM are not standing still but continuously upgrading their chip capabilities. In their pipeline ARM have 32/64 Bit multi-core chips (8 core and possibly 16 Core) 22 and 28 nano chips! Dream on Intel!
If Apple were to migrate to Intel that would mean Apple sacrificing their own chip design capabilities, recently enhanced by their Israeli Flash memory design capabilities. Why on each would Apple throw away the huge competitive advantage of being able to design their own chips to gain maximum efficiency with their OS software?
Far more likely is that Apple will migrate Macs to ARM Chips - Apple designed 64 Bit, 8 Multi-Core, 22 or 28 nano, with super efficient Flash.......sounds juicy to me!
I assume I was only short list of name, too.
Me confused?
There are a lot if people who have been saying, for several years now, that Apple won't converge the two OS's at all, and that it would be a bad idea. I've been saying, from the beginning, that they will. I've pointed out the origins of both, but that seemed to be thought to be of little significance. Now that Apple beginning (with Lion, mostly) to merge various functions and features, it's becoming more obvious to others that this is indeed happening. But Apple is still, for the most part, telling us that they will remain seperate.
I don't think that they will remain seperate. I think that even more code will converge. I even think that we will buy an app, likely from the App Store for this to happen, that will install on any of your devices, iOS, or otherwise, but just installing elements that will function on that particular device.
So we may see Pages install on every Apple device from just one purchase, but just load what will work on that device, be it a desktop, or a Touch. Fat Binaries is something Apple is quite familiar with, and so even if they are still using two processor families, it will work, just loading the binary needed on that platform.
This will make for a very smooth universe of devices.
But does this mean that every developer needs to develop a full MacOS app and then add the IOS elements before they can sell it through the App Store?
I think you are confusing what 'is possible' with what 'is practical'. Its like the lean forward and lean back argument vis a vis computers and telly. Its about context. To have a fully fledged word processing app on an iPhone or iPad I don't think makes sense. Its like the truck v the car argument. You don't need a crane, a trailer and 30" wheels on your daily car.
Me confused?
Th short list of AI posters that you thought might point that out.
Apple sees a fundamental difference between software for the keyboard-and-mouse-pointer Mac and that for the touchscreen iPad. Mountain Lion is not a step towards a single OS that powers both the Mac and iPad, but rather another in a series of steps toward defining a set of shared concepts, styles, and principles between two fundamentally distinct OSes.
http://daringfireball.net/2012/02/mountain_lion
I wholeheartedly believe that is the absolutely correct way to view this.
Exactly!
I think I'll use xOS and see if that catches on.
Perhaps it should be IOS across the board. The 'I' should stand for Internet with a capital 'I'. Then we would have: IOS small, med, large and XL for the ITV.
So far I don't think this is true at all. Why would I not want the OSX messaging app to be consistent with the iOS app? What's wrong with auto-save and auto-restore of windows?
I have yet to see an example of a technology or UI concept brought from iOS to OSX that has made me worse off. I can still run my open source unixy software from terminal -- which I do -- while gaining some of the advantages of iOS.
The only gripe I can see about the "iOS-ificiation" of OSX is that it might shift resources/efforts away from improving the X-specific aspects of OSX. For example, it would be nice to see some advances in the file system for power users, not just for users who want to only see files from within an app.
But I see no example of cases where Apple has taken away important features and replaced them with crippled iOS alternatives. If we wake up one day and can no longer go into terminal or open a Finder window, then we'll have something to complain about. But so far, I don't see the complaint.
Amen brother! ZFS? HFS+ is so antiquated.... Is it just me or does it seem like mountain lion is not going to bring ANY imporovements over lion or even snow leopard? Even lion was a very small step forward I think. I really dont think autosaving was made the best possible way in lion. It just made me uncomfiortable about my documents because I modify many times documents but need the old document aswell..
The day I cant use the terminal is the last day on os X for me. Not use bsd or linux software or java software. It absolutely makes no sense why they would take away this possibility but it may come someday if we dont fight it back. I wont swollow dumbing down os X with no alternatives. I think Lion has a lot of features i dont use or care of.... The istallation is a nightmare compared to snow leopard from a preinstalled image. I cant even make a deasent universal installer image nowadays which took 2 minutes and a few clicks earlier. I think lion is still going to bite me in ways if i like to reinstall a system...
And addressbook? What the fuck happoned with that one in lion???!!! Pig bastards!!!
Yeah, we'll eventually have a multitouch desktop OS that is operated in a way as different from the current keyboard/mouse paradigm as adding the mouse was from the keyboard/screen paradigm. I buy that.
But it better darn well be an OS that happens to run on phones and tablets, not the other way around. We need a file manager (and this is where Apple will really shine. They'll create something brand new here; an entirely new way of organizing and looking at your files) and to retain the rest of the features that make OS X OS X while incorporating the incredible potential of multitouch that makes iOS iOS.
We're beginning to see the first implementations of a new kind of file management:
Simply stated: Why should the [average] user know or care where his files are (and when/how they are saved/versioned/backed up...). We have computers that can do all that.
1) The OS (Lion) has versioning
2) Modern apps have autosaving
3) iCloud will evolve from an option [to store files] to the default
4) cross-device sync is already in place for many apps
5) some apps, like FCP X, use a built-in SQL db as part of their file structure -- future versions will allow collaboration by combining of these "individual" dbs into a cloud/server based multiuser collaboration db -- you can't change the Title on Clip 3 in Project B because Bill is editing that Title -- though, you can add video effects or edit sound...
You don't need to take it with you -- if you can access it from anywhere...
...think iTunes match -- each of our computers and iDevices have access to 16,177 items (I just checked). These are stored across 5 computers, and all accessible on any iDevice from iCloud -- wherever we are.
Gruber points out that Apple is now calling Mac OS X simply OS X. I wonder if that means they will start to focus on a consumer notebook and desktop line that aren't called Macs.
Either way, it looks like this sub-Mac OS X/post-Darwin OS they once referred to as OS X is now being rebranded. I guess we'll have to find a different term for the core system that they both share. I think I'll use xOS and see if that catches on.
I prefer OS-X, or xOS, for that matter, to Mac OS. I was using it because the X eol is getting ever nearer. aOS, perhaps? though that would get al messed up with IOS. I suspect there are a lot of names and version being bandied about at Apple these days.
We're beginning to see the first implementations of a new kind of file management:
Simply stated: Why should the [average] user know or care where his files are (and when/how they are saved/versioned/backed up...). We have computers that can do all that.
1) The OS (Lion) has versioning
2) Modern apps have autosaving
3) iCloud will evolve from an option [to store files] to the default
4) cross-device sync is already in place for many apps
5) some apps, like FCP X, use a built-in SQL db as part of their file structure -- future versions will allow collaboration by combining of these "individual" dbs into a cloud/server based multiuser collaboration db -- you can't change the Title on Clip 3 in Project B because Bill is editing that Title -- though, you can add video effects or edit sound...
You don't need to take it with you -- if you can access it from anywhere...
...think iTunes match -- each of our computers and iDevices have access to 16,177 items (I just checked). These are stored across 5 computers, and all accessible on any iDevice from iCloud -- wherever we are.
Have you ever wanted to upload a picture to a website using your iPhone or iPad? You can't do it without a special app specifically for that website. That is why Facebook, Twitter, Craigslist, etc. sites that use a lot of uploaded photos had to have their own app. I don't think iOS/iCloud file methodologies are necessarily an improvement over traditional file management. I would rather have access to the file system in addition to cloud storage.
I am not a fan of iOS on a Mac PC.
Making the OS stupid proof.
You should make your post stupid proof, because it makes no sense.
No features are being removed from ML, it isn't being dumbed down. Features are being added, which leverages the innovations and usage patterns from the mobile space, providing tighter integration of data between platforms and seamless syncing. I don't see how you can't understand that most people will largely benefit from this. You want stupid proof? Go look at Windows 8.
....They are showing they want to capitalize on their iOS popularity by making the Mac more familiar to non-Mac users.
AGREED - nail meet hammer
Amen brother! ZFS? HFS+ is so antiquated.... Is it just me or does it seem like mountain lion is not going to bring ANY imporovements over lion or even snow leopard? Even lion was a very small step forward I think. I really dont think autosaving was made the best possible way in lion. It just made me uncomfiortable about my documents because I modify many times documents but need the old document aswell..
The day I cant use the terminal is the last day on os X for me. Not use bsd or linux software or java software. It absolutely makes no sense why they would take away this possibility but it may come someday if we dont fight it back. I wont swollow dumbing down os X with no alternatives. I think Lion has a lot of features i dont use or care of.... The istallation is a nightmare compared to snow leopard from a preinstalled image. I cant even make a deasent universal installer image nowadays which took 2 minutes and a few clicks earlier. I think lion is still going to bite me in ways if i like to reinstall a system...
And addressbook? What the fuck happoned with that one in lion???!!! Pig bastards!!!
99% of people have no idea what you're taking about. These are the people Apple are making products for and the market they are appealing to- not you. Anyway, keep your panties on. Terminal isn't going away anytime soon. To a clear-headed person that realizes now everyone in the world is like them, Apple is making all the right moves. There will always be people like you who don't agree, but that doesn't mean you should expect Apple to cater their product decisions and strategy to the niche market you're in.
First off I have intelligence and 25 years of IT, VM and Data Center experience and have watched a lot of MFG's do this same thing not just Microsoft ,so if you would be so kind as to refrain from taking pop shots and being condescending, please.
You say that iOS will not become the MacOS, how do you know this?
There is more evidence that they are moving MacOS in the direction of iOS than not.
They are replacing apps with in OS X with iOS versions slowly converting OS X to iOS via a slow and methodical transition.
However, for arguments sake I will give you your premiss that the two OS's will remain separate.
They are still dumbing down MacOS which is "obviously and surely a bad thing".
Go ahead and toast me up.
I hate to say this but maybe it is time for an OS X Lite or home version.
In what way are they dumbing down OS X? Surely, improving and standardizing the UI across several device classes is strengthening the OS -- not dumbing it down. As are, automatic versioning, backup restart, location services, AirPlay, Core Media APIs...
I can still do all the things I could do with every prior version of OS X (Rosetta excepted) -- and a whole lot more (a lot of that is due to iOS features being rewritten and reported to OS X).
I apologize.
I am seeing a lot of points here including this response causing me to pause and re-evaluate my position.
I..what..can't process... *head explodes*
I think this is the first time in my history on the internet where I have read such a statement. I'm not even joking.
What is that new icon next to Spotlight?
That is how you access Notifications. It looks just like it does on iOS with the gray cloth background except that instead of sliding done from the top it slides the desktop over from right to left to reveal your notifications.
The one significant change I like about Notifications on ML over iOS is that it slides the desktop over to reveal Notifcations behind the desktop. Whereas on iOS the Notifications come in front of the desktop. This is significant and I think wrong in iOS because that background should indicate what is underneath, not on top. Perhaps that's me niggling but I think it's an important differentiation.